Now it comes to pass in what I call life in the armed states of America that texting while sitting in a movie theater has its own cause-of-death category.

Actually, it was arguing about texting that set in motion the events that led to the fatal shooting of a 43-year-old man by a 71-year-old retired cop in a Florida movie theater. Testosterone, inconsideration, lack of humility and affronts to one's manhood or pride, I'm sure, fueled the latest tragedy.

According to Pasco County deputies, the shooter, Curtis Reeves Jr., objected that the victim, Chad Oulson, was texting while the two men, their wives and about 25 others in the audience were in a multiplex Monday afternoon in suburban Tampa to watch "Lone Survivor," a movie about U.S. soldiers ambushed in Afghanistan.

It apparently did not matter to Reeves, a veteran lawman who retired from the Tampa police force in 1993, that Oulson was texting his 3-year old daughter and that the movie had not started yet. Reeves sought out management to complain and then came back alone. The texting spat resumed. Oulson reportedly threw popcorn at Reeves. The retired cop then pulled a handgun from a pants pocket and shot Oulson in the chest, according to Pasco County Sheriff Chris Nocco. The shooting also injured Oulson's wife, who apparently tried to shield her husband with her hand. Oulson was pronounced dead despite CPR efforts.

Reeves was disarmed by an off-duty sheriff's deputy in the theater and jailed without bail on second-degree murder charges. He apparently plans to invoke that state's controversial Stand Your Ground law as a defense: He told cops Oulson swung something at his face and approached him in a menacing manner. Witnesses, though, told police all they saw was Oulson throwing the bag of popcorn before the shot rang out.

A Tampa-area couple stepped forward after learning of the movie theater shooting to disclose that Reeves similarly confronted them and other moviegoers in the same movie theater Dec. 28.

Jamira Dixon, and her husband, Michael, told reporters Reeves was very irate and agitated toward her while she was texting, even though Reeves' wife fielded a phone call during the showing of "The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug."

"It could have been us," Dixon said after she learned of the fatal shooting and recognized Reeves' face through media reports.

Now, I don't like folks talking or texting in movie theaters either ... during the playing of a movie. But I don't understand why folks -- unless they live in, work in, or regularly visit a high-crime or very dangerous place -- feel a need to pack. Strapping to go see a movie or walk into a public place like the state Capitol building in St. Paul solely because you have a permit to do so makes absolutely no sense to me.

Charles Cummings, 68, a moviegoer who went to Oulson's aid, said as much to reporters hours after the incident.

"I can't believe anybody would bring a gun to a movie," said Cummings, a former Marine and Vietnam veteran who went to see a movie with his son and came out with Oulson's blood on his clothing. Well, gangbangers and criminals probably do. I wonder if the deputy who detained Reeves had one on him. But the incident makes one wonder whether we also need to worry about carry-permit holders who can't keep their tempers or emotions in check.

GUNS IN THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE?

It's a concern that has House Rep. Michael Paymar, DFL-St. Paul, frankly banging his head on the proverbial wall in recent years. He's an avid supporter of banning all firearms -- outside of peace officers and Capitol security -- from the Capitol and installing magnometers. Last week, the advisory committee on Capitol security rejected that move in favor of adding extra personnel security and requiring permit holders to notify Capitol security every five years instead of every 10 years of their intent to carry inside the people's house. The vote was 4-2, with committee member Minnesota Chief Justice Lorie Gildea abstaining because the issue could come up before the court. Ironically, the Justice Center where the court convenes has metal detectors.

"The Capitol Security Task Force has a position that there hasn't been a problem yet,' so why punish law-abiding citizens,'" said Paymar, who said recently that his ninth term this year will be his last. "Well, a law-abiding citizen is only law-abiding until they choose to be non-law-abiding. I understand the desire to have the building open and accessible, but we live in different times, with a proliferation of firearms in our society and with plenty of people with anti-government sentiments."

Paymar and others in the public safety field believe a shooting in the building is not a matter of if, but when. He says he couldn't care less if he continues to be vilified by Minnesota's Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance "and politicians who are more concerned with their NRA rating."

"The people who know about risk and vulnerabilities in building(s) know that we should have magnetometers (as do) courthouses where volatile issues are discussed," he said in an email. "This isn't about the Second Amendment or personal protection, but it's about the safety of the school kids who come to the Capitol, the staff, citizens, members of the public to be in a safe environment. This issue won't go away, nor will I."

I agree with gun-rights advocates that guns don't kill people. But they leave out the rest: people with guns or access to them kill people -- wives, husbands, schoolkids, themselves, friends, bystanders, rival dope dealers, co-workers, moviegoers texting their kids -- at a rate higher than at least 26 other countries in the developed world.

It's a sad state of affairs indeed in the armed states of America, with an estimated 90 guns per 100 people. Even sadder is that we wring our hands or shrug these events off as collateral damage or the way it is, seemingly impotent or stubbornly unwilling to work together to find better ways to curb the carnage.